Jump to content


Photo

Ad Hoc Storifying


  • Please log in to reply
115 replies to this topic

#101 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 14 August 2017 - 12:29 PM

Schera: Your responses to my most recent posts will determine whether you go onto the ignore list. Do you follow?

 
I'm sorry your session seems to have expired, please leave a message with my secretary miss Fjuri, on the way out.
 
:gotcha:

.
Welcome to ignore!

Schwing! Top of the page!

#102 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 14 August 2017 - 12:35 PM

Without proper attribution, not only is the source of the blue in doubt, but the source of what is referenced within the blue is in doubt. This is a twice-cooked crime. On top of it all, we must accept an appeal to the blue-writer's authority--nearly thrice-cooked.

Note that I did not ask for proper attribution, I asked the reason it was withheld.

this is incorrect.
enzymes and catalysts are well known properties of chemical substances.
some types of reactions will not take place at all without them.
...

.
what is incorrect? Your reply will determine whether you go on ignore. Do you understand?

i explained what and why in post 90.

is it supposed to hurt my feelings if you put me on ignore?

ignoring what someone has to say isn't very scientific of you.
kind of sounds like what waddington had to endure, eh?
or mclintok.

.
Welcome to ignore! (You couldn't understand that I made no reference to enzymes.)

#103 what if

what if

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 61
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • indiana

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:10 PM

Got any examples of a protein assembling itself, . . .

search on the following string:
naturally occuring protiens
for a few

or a kinesin motor?

i've seen animations of this, but i didn't realize what it was.
it's hard to fathom how something like this would come about.

but the rotor blades vertically standing on the rotor head, and put the human foot on the thigh. Now there won't be correct function, which proves those particular parts were placed there on purpose.

the same can be said of water.
add to, or delete from, a molecule of water, and guess what, you don't have water anymore.
water is nowhere near being "intelligently designed".
you can't "rearrange" the atoms in a water molecule, because the bond angles are fixed and there are only 3 atoms.
this doesn't apply to larger molecules, and if you rearranged these molecules then you have something that functions differently than the original, maybe doesn't function at all.
these larger molecules aren't intelligently designed either.
 

I am not inventing these things - they are, "reality".

i'm not either.
i'm simply trying to be as fair as possible, without taking sides.
there is no doubt that some form of "evolution" happens.
the question of origins however, is one giant question mark.
science has no plausible scenario for how it all came about

It's up to you, you can ignore reality and keep bleating that we need to understand non-existent macro evolution or you can accept the blatant truth, that only God could have done this because the intelligence is too great.

yes, i firmly believe we need to understand how macro evolution happens.
the natural selection/ random mutation / gradual accumulation paradigm is utter nonsense.
you have seen for yourself that enzymes/ catalysts can effect very rapid change.

Give 1,000 atheists five lifetimes each, and all the smartest on the planet, they won't come up with one viable lifeform, which means deductively, that means that the intelligence required is much greater than a human mind.

this is a matter of abiogenesis, how it all came together in the first place.

don't worry mike, i'm NOT in a position to declare "there is no god".
i have honestly tried to do just that, and i've been unable to.
you worry too much.
 

For me it's a joke that I have to teach adults intelligent design. That says it all, for me.


the thing that gets under my skin concerning god is, WHY?
why does god do all of this?
you can believe just for the heck of it, or you can believe for a reason.
i'm not the type that puts blind faith in anything, although i do admit that there may be a great deal of evidence that we aren't seeing as evidence.
life itself for example.

#104 what if

what if

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 61
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • indiana

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:22 PM

Welcome to ignore! (You couldn't understand that I made no reference to enzymes.)

don't be clicking on "veiw post" on my posts please.

the ignordsen bombsight strikes!

har har har ! ! !

geez, i'm turning into mike :think:



#105 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 669 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 14 August 2017 - 03:06 PM

 

You just can't bear the idea that we are simply advanced mammals and our close cousins are chimps and bonobos, I don't understand why that should be so distasteful.

sorry wibble, the c-value paradox blows this concept out of the water.
man IS NOT the end product of a complexity chain, nor is it even close to it.
to imply that man is one of the most complex lifeforms on the planet is either a lie or ignorance.
ah yes:
Imagine the following scenario. You are absolutely convinced that humans are the most complex species but total genome size doesn't reflect your conviction.

etc. etc....

 

 
What are you talking about Whatif ? I made no mention of genome size or end products of complexity chains. I would have thought it fairly obvious that by "advanced mammals" I am referring to the sort of things that set us apart from other mammals, you know, intellectual capacity, language, technological ability, that sort of thing.



#106 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 669 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 14 August 2017 - 03:44 PM

This is what happens when we pesonyfy a concept such as science and associate science to so many different meanings.Take another look at the statement below:



I refuse to ignore the enormous swathe of scientific data from multiple disciplines that long ago flicked YEC into the dustbin. You apparently find a way of doing that, but you don't do it with science.

Notice the shift in the meaning of the word science to imply that science has life-like qualities and can "flick" things (something most of us believe only living intelligent beings can do). When is the last time any of us has observed "science" (another name for our reasoning process) flick something into a dustbin?

 


Why do you continue with this inanity ?

Let me know if you believe science (think of it as shorthand for the accumulated scientific study and research undertaken by scientists in the quest for a better understanding of nature if you find the word "science" so difficult to comprehend the meaning of in a sentence) has flicked a geocentric universe, or aether, or astrology into the dustbin ? Do you believe we can use science to arrive at firm conclusions about the likelihood of something being true, or not ?

 

Wibble has demonstrate the incconguences in his reasoning process (the practice of science) in the past!. For example he essentially said Adolph Hitler was not aiding evolution when he killed 9 million people. Actually, according to Wibble's reasoning process, Hitler thwarted evo by removing 9 million from the gene pool. However, the the 1.5 billion beings aborted (killed) since 1980 he seems to find no reason to condemn as anti evolution! 9 million compared to 1.5 billion. Wow!

 

I don't remember ever talking about this, I think you have me confused with someone else



#107 what if

what if

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 787 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 61
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • indiana

Posted 14 August 2017 - 04:15 PM

What are you talking about Whatif ? I made no mention of genome size or end products of complexity chains. I would have thought it fairly obvious that by "advanced mammals" I am referring to the sort of things that set us apart from other mammals, you know, intellectual capacity, language, technological ability, that sort of thing.

animals may be more intelligent than we think they are.
i used to have a pet dog i raised from a puppy.
its mother abandoned it and i had to feed it with a wet rag for awhile until it could eat semi solid food.
about 9 months into my "ownership" of this dog, it was sitting in my chair with me.
i was playing some game on the computer, and this dog started making sounds that resembled human speech.
i couldn't believe it, i swear this dog was trying to "talk" to me.
all i could do was hug him and say i love you.

animals cannot possibly be "dumb".
i believe it would take a fair amount of intelligence for my dog to attempt something like he did.

another remarkable experience was with my moms pet papillion.
she let a friend of hers take the dog to the park, about mile from here.
the dog got loose and someone picked it up and apparently took it home with them, about 2 miles from here.
the dog got loose again and headed straight for our house, running down the road.
i know this happened because someone got behind the dog and followed it so it wouldn't get run over.
they said this dog knew exactly where he was going because he never stopped, and came trotting right up to our front door.
as far as i know, the dog has never been to either place before (the park or that house).
a human in this situation would most likely be hopelessly lost.
that was about 3 years ago, and the dog is now 16 years old and has since developed cataracts in both eyes and cannot see.
it's always falling off the porch or the ramp to the front door or every once in awhile running into the wall.

what makes the above so incredible?
we think animals are dumb, or somehow less intelligent than we are, that's what.
how that dog made it home, i'll never know
  • Mike Summers likes this

#108 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 741 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 14 August 2017 - 05:08 PM

What are you talking about Whatif ? I made no mention of genome size or end products of complexity chains. I would have thought it fairly obvious that by "advanced mammals" I am referring to the sort of things that set us apart from other mammals, you know, intellectual capacity, language, technological ability, that sort of thing.

animals may be more intelligent than we think they are.i used to have a pet dog i raised from a puppy.its mother abandoned it and i had to feed it with a wet rag for awhile until it could eat semi solid food.about 9 months into my "ownership" of this dog, it was sitting in my chair with me.i was playing some game on the computer, and this dog started making sounds that resembled human speech.i couldn't believe it, i swear this dog was trying to "talk" to me.all i could do was hug him and say i love you.animals cannot possibly be "dumb".i believe it would take a fair amount of intelligence for my dog to attempt something like he did.another remarkable experience was with my moms pet papillion.she let a friend of hers take the dog to the park, about mile from here.the dog got loose and someone picked it up and apparently took it home with them, about 2 miles from here.the dog got loose again and headed straight for our house, running down the road.i know this happened because someone got behind the dog and followed it so it wouldn't get run over.they said this dog knew exactly where he was going because he never stopped, and came trotting right up to our front door.as far as i know, the dog has never been to either place before (the park or that house).a human in this situation would most likely be hopelessly lost.that was about 3 years ago, and the dog is now 16 years old and has since developed cataracts in both eyes and cannot see.it's always falling off the porch or the ramp to the front door or every once in awhile running into the wall.what makes the above so incredible?we think animals are dumb, or somehow less intelligent than we are, that's what.how that dog made it home, i'll never know

"how that dog made it home, i'll never know"

Creationists already know the answer to that question..

Same question applies to the Pacific Plover and a myriad of other animals with incredible built in navigation systems that CANNOT be merely explained away by microbes to Microbiologist "Evolution"..
  • Mike Summers likes this

#109 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 15 August 2017 - 08:10 AM

Wibble said:

 
Why do you continue with this inanity ?

Science (most common definition=our reasoning process) is supposed to answer the question, "What caused the effect I observe in front of me?" That you view non- scientific reasoning (critical precision thinking) as probleatic (insane)is an interesting conclusion. Critical thinking (science) benefits from not being cluttered by magical poetic concepts.
[/quote]
Let me know if you believe science (think of it as shorthand for the accumulated scientific study and research undertaken by scientists in the quest for a better understanding of nature if you find the word "science" so difficult to comprehend the meaning of in a sentence) has flicked a geocentric universe, or aether, or astrology into the dustbin ? Do you believe we can use science to arrive at firm conclusions about the likelihood of something being true, or not ?
[/quote]
And through their practice of thinking (doing critiical thinking) observing an effect in the present, formulating an hypothesis, testing that hypothesis repeatedly to see if the result of the test is consistant. That being done they can avail of their conclusions. However that does not impede our responsibility our need to validate (check) out their conclusions via ourthinking process. For, we are all scientists that have a memory full of conclusions we have formed from our ownexperiments--some of which have been proven repeatably to be true, others that we have discared because they haven't been proven. 

Mike S said: Wibble has demonstrate the incconguences in his reasoning process (the practice of science) in the past! For example he essentially said Adolph Hitler was not aiding evolution when he killed 9 million people. Actually, according to Wibble's reasoning process, Hitler thwarted evo by removing 9 million from the gene pool. However, the 1.5 billion beings aborted (killed) since 1980 he seems to find no reason to condemn as anti evolution! 9 million compared to 1.5 billion. Wow!
 
[quote] I don't remember ever talking about this, I think you have me confused with someone else

Fine. Then what do you think? Can anyone thwart evolution?

Quote

#110 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 15 August 2017 - 04:40 PM

This is quite like an insane asylum.

#111 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 15 August 2017 - 04:55 PM

And you fit right in. LOL :)
  • Schera Do likes this

#112 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 15 August 2017 - 09:24 PM

And you fit right in. LOL :)

.
I won't argue that.

#113 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 16 August 2017 - 02:19 AM

And you fit right in. LOL :)

.
I won't argue that.
.

.
I thought about this: "I wouldn't get far arguing that," but decided that it might cause argumentation. LOL.
.

And you fit right in. LOL :)



#114 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 741 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 17 August 2017 - 12:09 AM

This is quite like an insane asylum.


Yup.. But the Creationists are the doctors and staff that have to put up with the patients who go around saying...

"I am an accidental ape that evolved from pond scum for no reason and I believe in frog to prince fairytales and I believe that all of the matter in the universe came to be when nothing exploded and a self replicating DNA molecule encoded with millions of base pairs with specified genetic information was able to create itself out of dirt air heat and water.....

We are here trying to cure your insanity.... Yet you lunatics refuse to accept the only cure that can cure your mental illness. Jesus, the author of life itself.. We wont give up on you though..

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life" John 3:16

Tic Toc Tic Toc. You cant stop the clock..


"Darwin made it possible to be an Intellectually fulfilled Atheist"

Richard Dawkins

#115 Schera Do

Schera Do

    Referent Police

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Critical analysis and referents, Ephectic, Ultimate questions & how to answer, political philosophy, Constitutional Conservatism
  • Age: 55
  • (private)
  • Agnostic
  • Northeastern U.S. of A.

Posted 17 August 2017 - 02:57 AM

FYI to peanut gallery; my current ignore list is as follows:

Goku
Blitzking
what if

#116 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 741 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 17 August 2017 - 03:19 AM

FYI to peanut gallery; my current ignore list is as follows:GokuBlitzkingwhat if

We won't give up on you.. Your eternal soul is worth fighting for!

"The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research but purely the product of the imagination."

(Albert Fleishman, professor of zoology & comparative anatomy at Erlangen University)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users